Saturday, November 24, 2012

Please click on headline below to go to You Tube and use the full-screen option for better viewing of Dick Bennett's video recorded Nov. 19, 2012, to run Nov. 25-30, 2012, on Channel 18 on Cox Cable in Northwest Arkansas as well as ATT U-verse 99 and on the public channel's Web site.

Bill titles and the summary above are written by the sponsor. H.R. stands for House of Representatives bill.

[HERE ARE THE DISMAL FACTS. Don’t let your representatives forget you want this bill to pass. Just as we seek to restrain the out of control Department of War, we offer a Department of Peace for the future the world needs.]TAKE A POSITION

BILL OVERVIEW

Status:

Introduced Feb 18, 2011

Referred to Committee Feb 18, 2011

Reported by Committee (not yet occurred)

Passed House (not yet occurred)

Passed Senate (not yet occurred)

Signed by the President (not yet occurred)

This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on February 18, 2011, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Prognosis:

This bill has a 3% chance of being enacted. The following factors were considered:

The sponsor is a member of the minority party. (-2%)

A cosponsor in the minority party has a high leadership score. (+3%)

A cosponsor is the ranking member of a committee to which the bill has been referred. (+9%)

Just 4% of all House of Representatives bills in 2009–2010 were enacted.

Text:

• Read Bill Text

Cosponsors:

show cosponsors (63)

Committees:

House Committee on Education and the Workforce

House Committee on Foreign Affairs

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

House Committee on the Judiciary

The committee chair determines whether a bill will move past the committee stage.

Primary Source

THOMAS (The Library of Congress)

THOMAS is updated generally one day after events occur and events since the last update may not be reflected here.

How to Support or Oppose H.R. 808

So you want to take a side? Here are some tips on how to be an effective advocate for your issue.

Write a Letter

Start by writing a letter to Congress using the POPVOX website. Click the button on the right to get started.

Does this work? Well keep in mind you are one of around 700,000 residents in your district, many of whom are writing letters just like you are. Congressional offices receive hundreds to thousands of letters each day.

Your representatives want to hear from you (after all, they want to know how to keep your vote next election!). Just keep in mind they couldn’t possibly respond to everyone personally.

POPVOX was co-created by the same guy behind GovTrack and is the most effective way to get your message to your representative and senators.

50%

50%

H.R. 808: Department of Peace Act of 2011

SPEAK UP at POPVOX

Band Together

Strength does come in numbers. Find others who are advocating on the same issue as you, and work with them to send a clear message to Congress.

We can help you find others interested in H.R. 808. Tell us you want to create a group for this bill by cliking the button on the right.

CREATE A GROUP

Be an Information Leader

One of the hardest parts about advocacy is just finding out what is happening in Congress. Leg work pays off. Here are some starting points:

o Call up the office of the sponsor of the bill and ask about the latest status of the bill, including what committees are considering the bill and if there are any hearings or “markup” meetings scheduled.

o Check out who is cosponsoring the bill. Does it have cosponsors on the committees it is assigned to? Does it have cosponsors in the majority party?

o Read the bill. You will probably have questions about it. Find experts such as academic researchers or lobbyists at nonprofits who can help you wade through the language of the bill.

o Tell others about what you find. They’ll appreciate that you took the time to help others understand their government.

THE PEACE ALLIANCE

• HOME

• WHO WE ARE

• ISSUES AND ADVOCACY

• JOIN THE MOVEMENT

• TAKE ACTION

• TOOLS AND EDUCATION

About the Campaign for a U.S. Department of Peace

Congressman John Conyers meets with a group of MI activists

at our recent conference in D.C.and gets them pumped up!

"I cannot tell you with what weapons mankind would fight WW3, but I can assure you that WW4 would be fought with sticks and stones."

~ Albert Einstein

There is currently a bill before the U.S. House of Representatives to establish a United States Department of Peace. This historic measure will augment our current problem-solving options, providing practical, nonviolent solutions to the problems of domestic and international conflict.

The legislation will pass from bill to law under one condition: that a wave of citizen interest rise up from the American people and make itself heard in the halls of Congress.

During the 20th Century, over 100 million people lost their lives to war -- most of whom were non-combatants. Now, at the dawn of the 21st century, the extent and current speed of nuclear proliferation makes the achievement of non-violent alternatives to war the most urgent need of the human race.

A Department of Peace will work to:

• Provide much-needed assistance to efforts by city, county, and state governments in coordinating existing programs; as well as develop new programs based on best practices nationally

• Teach violence prevention and mediation to America's school children

• Support our military with complementary approaches to peace-building.

• Create and administer a U.S. Peace Academy, acting as a sister organization to the U.S. Military Academy.

• And more…

From the growing rate of domestic incarceration to increasing problems of international violence, the United States has no more serious problem in our midst than the problem of violence itself. Prison-building is our largest urban industry, and we spend over 400 billion dollars a year on military-related expenditures. Yet there is within the workings of the U.S. government, no platform from which to seriously wage peace. We place no institutional heft behind an effort to address the causal issues of violence, diminishing its psychological force before it erupts into material conflict. From child abuse to genocide, from the murder of one to the slaughter of thousands, it is increasingly senseless to merely wait until violence has erupted before addressing the deeper well from which it springs.

The problem of violence is a many layered one, and its solution will be, as well. While no one action -- governmental or otherwise -- will provide a single solution to such an entrenched and deeply rooted problem, we must treat the problem itself as an all-systems breakdown requiring an all-systems response.

The campaign to establish a U.S. Department of Peace is only one aspect of a fundamental response to the problem of violence, but it is critical. It represents an important collective effort, as American citizens, to do everything we possibly can to save the world for our children's children.

Throughout America, there are countless peace-builders and peace-building projects. Those skilled in ameliorating the effects of violence - from conflict resolution experts to nonviolent communicators - have proven their effectiveness at treating root causes of violence. Peace is more than the absence of war; it is a positive state of being predicated on the presence of a peaceful heart. The mission of the Peace Alliance is to move this realization from the margins of our political dialogue to its rightful, central place within our national understanding. The humanitarian impulse to foster brotherhood and justice is not just an utopian ideal; it is an issue critical to our national security.

Domestically, the Department of Peace will develop policies and allocate resources to effectively reduce the levels of domestic and gang violence, child abuse, and various other forms of societal discord. Internationally, the Department will advise the President and Congress on the most sophisticated ideas and techniques regarding peace-creation among nations.

The Peace Alliance educates and inspires thousands throughout the country with the knowledge, skill and enthusiasm to become powerful citizen activists on behalf of the Department of Peace legislation. Our campaign has citizen organizers working in all 50 states. Local activists are mobilizing a mighty wave of momentum by working with their members of congress, writing editorials, doing local radio and TV interviews, organizing local talks and trainings, getting city council endorsements, visiting with Police Chiefs, Fire Chiefs, Military Officials, Prison Officials, Directors of Abuse Shelters, School Boards, etc. to share and discuss how a Department of Peace would benefit their community.

Take Action! Tell Congress to get behind H.R. 808, legislation to establish a U.S. Dept. of Peace.

DONATE

JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST

TAKE ACTION

Issues and Advocacy

 The Faces of Peace

 Department of Peace

 History of the Legislation

 Key Highlights

 Frequently Asked Questions

 Talking Points

 Individual and Organizational Endorsements

 City Councils and Local Governing Bodies

 Youth PROMISE Act

 International Peacebuilding

 Domestic Peacebuilding

Share this page with friends

Shop online?

Help the Peace Alliance by using our affiliate link to shop on Amazon.

We are pleased to announce that we have beautiful 2013 "The Gift of Peace" holiday cards available for pre-order today.

This year's peace card features a shimmering globe placed gently in 'our' hands, with the message "The Gift of Peace." It is a beautiful image, accompanied by the simple message within: "the gift of peace on earth lies in each of our hands."

These 5x7 eco-friendly cards are available for pre-order today!

Read more

________________________________________

Peacebuilding Structures Growing in Federal Government

Over the last two years support has grown in Washington to prioritize peacebuilding and to re-organize the Foreign Affairs bureaucracy to elevate the prominence of peacebuilding within our government. Read an overview of some of the exciting developments.

Read more

________________________________________

Become a Peace Partner: Help Sustain our Work

We face a myriad of challenges, including war, gang violence, suicide, bullying, depression, domestic abuse, workplace conflict, personal stress and more. At this moment in history it is imperative that we invest in and prioritize work and practices that can help foster the peace that we all desire. We cannot do this without a large-scale constituency working to make it so. That is our core mission and the task before us. It's why we need your help!

Read more

________________________________________

Stop Bullying: Sign Petition for Safe Schools Improvement Act

The Safe Schools Improvement Act ( S.506 and H.R. 1648) will ensure that: Schools and districts have comprehensive and effective student conduct policies that include clear prohibitions regarding bullying and harassment, including LGBT youth; Schools and districts focus on effective prevention strategies and professional development designed to help school personnel meaningfully address issues associated with bullying and harassment; more... Act now!

Read more

________________________________________

Making Peace a Priority: Advocacy Training Call Series - Audio Posted

Listen to audio now. Do you long to make a difference in the world? Do you want to build-up your skills and confidence to effectively enroll support in a way that could actually help shift the world? One of the most profound ways you can make a difference in the world is to effectively engage your elected officials and members of your community in a worldview where the work and practices of peace become our organized norm. Join us!

Read more

________________________________________

CA Democratic Party Adopts Key Peace Planks!

Thanks to the hard work of CA Peace Alliance supporters and our partners, the CA Democratic Party adopted a number of key peacebuilding planks into their platform at their 2012 convention, in the areas of: children, young adults & their families; education; criminal justice: culture & the arts; veterans; and world peace planks including support of policies that provide domestic violence prevention, gang prevention, anti-bullying programs, and parenting skills; peace education and mediation; restorative justice; nonviolent conflict training for veterans and much more. Check it out!

Read more

________________________________________

International Peacebuilding Budget Priorities

Four key areas that need greater investment in the coming budget cycle. Make your voice heard!

Read more

________________________________________

Facebook Updates Twitter Updates

The Peace Alliance

powered by

DONATE

JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST

TAKE ACTION

Visit DoPeace

Share this page with friends

Shop online?

Help the Peace Alliance by using our affiliate link to shop on Amazon.

Remember your first walk for peace? Soldiers march, peacemakers walk (but with no less commitment to action). From every action for peace we emerge, our nation peaceful emerges. From every victim awareness grows, from every war crime consciousness, future children not rifles, not drones. We will then tolerate the deaths no longer, having found our conscience and courage.

Had we not attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments since 1945, would the US be less secure today?

Had we not attempted to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements struggling against intolerable regimes since 1945, would we be less secure?

Had we not caused the deaths of several million people and condemned many millions more to homelessness and hunger, would we be insecure today?

Had our puppets not killed, wounded, imprisoned, and tortured thousands during the overthrow of the elected president of Guatemala in 1954 for the United Fruit Company and out of paranoid anti-communism, would we be in danger today? And so terribly on, as detailed in William Blum’s books (and by hundreds of other historians). Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II (1995) traces both subversions and outright invasions in chronological order to the 1990s. Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower (2000) analyzes US relationships with terrorism, US use of weapons of mass destruction, and major instances of US dishonest and destructive behavior—like a rogue elephant--against the world. These two books lay the strong foundation for the peace movement’s opposition to ruthless US imperialism since 1945.

So let us walk, ring bells, and sign the People’s Charter for Armistice Day 2012.

Ring Bells on Armistice Day!

The eleventh minute of the eleventh hour of Armistice Day, the eleventh day of the eleventh month.

October 9, 2012

On November 11, 1918 the guns of the "War to end wars" finally fell silent after more than 29,000,000 soldiers had been killed or wounded. Bells rang out across the world to celebrate the silence, and in 1938, Congress declared Armistice Day, November 11, a national holiday, "to be dedicated to the cause of world peace."

Congress changed the holiday to "Veterans Day" in 1954, to include World War II. In 2008, the Veterans For Peace (VFP) convention voted to return to the original name of the holiday, "Armistice Day."

VFP Chapter 27 in Minneapolis for many years has asked churches to ring their bells 11 times at 11a.m., on November 11, as it was done at the end of World War I.

This year Veterans for Peace is partnering with Move to Amend to expand Armistice Day observances. Move to Amend works to end corporate personhood and "money is speech" in elections through constitutional amendment. These goals are key if we are to "abolish war as an instrument of national policy."

We say YA BASTA! Enough already!

To organize a vigil or bell ringing ceremony to reclaim Armistice Day as a day "dedicated to the cause of world peace," contact Larry Johnson, member of VFP Chapter 27 and a supporter of Move to Amend at larryjvfp@gmail.com or 612-747-3904.

Use the flyer below to announce your local action.

Ever Onward!

David Cobb (Move to Amend & Mike Ferner (Veterans For Peace)

Document:

flyer_armistice_day.doc

Groups:

U.S. - National

Topic(s):

Military Industrial Complex

Launch of ‘The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World’

May 25, 2011 by robertjburrowes http://thepeoplesnonviolencecharter.wordpress.com/

The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World was launched simultaneously on 11 November 2011 at several locations around the world.

The aim of this Charter is to create a worldwide movement to end violence in all its forms. The People’s Charter will give voice to the millions of ordinary people around the world who want an end to war, oppression, environmental destruction and violence of all kinds. We hope that this Charter will support and unite the courageous nonviolent struggles of ordinary people all over the world.

As you will see, The People’s Charter describes very thoroughly the major forms of violence in the world. It also presents a strategy to end this violence.

We can each play a part in stopping violence and in creating a peaceful and just world. Some of us will focus on reducing our consumption, some of us will parent our children in a way that fosters children’s safety and empowerment, some of us will use nonviolent resistance in the face of military violence. Everyone’s contribution is important and needed. We hope this Charter will be a springboard for us all to take steps to create a peaceful and just world, however small and humble these steps may be. By listening to the deep truth of ourselves, each other and the Earth, each one of us can find our own unique way to help create this nonviolent world.

Why did we choose 11 November as the date to launch The People’s Charter?

‘When I was a boy … all the people of all the nations which fought in the First World War were silent during the eleventh minute of the eleventh hour of Armistice Day, which was the eleventh day of the eleventh month. It was at that minute in nineteen-hundred and eighteen, that millions upon millions of human beings stopped butchering one another. I have talked to old men who were on battlefields at that minute. They have told me in one way or another that the sudden silence was the Voice of God. So we still have among us some men who can remember when God spoke clearly to mankind.’ (Kurt Vonnegut Jr., an atheist humanist, in his novel Breakfast of Champions.)

Organisation

So far, the organising groups in various locations have organised launch events in their localities around the world. Some groups are organising follow-up events so that other people have the chance to become involved in local, personal networks.

See ‘Future Events’ for information about the next public event nearest you.

Signing the Charter

The People’s Charter can be read and signed online: click on ‘Read Charter’ or ‘Sign Charter’ in the sidebar. http://thepeoplesnonviolencecharter.wordpress.com/about/

‘A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history.’ Mohandas K. Gandhi

The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World was posted on 25 May 2011.

Mesopotamia is a capitalist’s dreamscape. As one put it, “If the United States was going to the trouble of invading Iraq, shouldn’t American companies reap the rewards?”

The Bush administration has answered affirmatively, Los Angeles Times reporter Miller tells us. First came the tanks, then the suits looking to clean up in what promised to be very lucrative times—for Americans, that is, who always won out over local suppliers, who, with a little cash, might actually have turned into friends rather than insurgents. Consider the children’s hospital that Laura Bush so dearly wanted for feel-good purposes. The Republican head of foreign operations for the House Appropriations Committee asked, “Why should we build a hospital for kids first when kids in Iraq need clean water?” Right, but the politico shelved his objections after NSC staffers came calling to make it clear that the First Lady really wanted the legacy. The American builder made out, though the hospital is a shell and the kids still don’t have clean water—to say nothing of electricity, vaccinations, food and other niceties. Part of the problem, by Miller’s account, is that there was “never any single [American] agency that took control of the reconstruction effort”; another is that big corporations such as Bechtel and the notorious Halliburton were offered uncompetitive-bid, secret-contract agreements to carve up the reconstruction economy for themselves; yet another is that vultures such as the aptly named principals of the security firm Custer Battles were given free rein to rip off Americans and Iraqis alike. In the face of this officially sponsored looting, absence of accountability and shameless profiteering—all ongoing—one ethical hero of Miller’s tale commits suicide, while hundreds of GIs and Iraqis die.

Another epitaph for Mr. Bush’s War, and a book sure to fascinate—and anger—its readers.

[This letter arrived after my March 19, 2012 Newsletter was posted, but it is just as relevant today. Dick]

Dear James ,

Today is the ninth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. The military occupation of Iraq is over, but the war continues in the untold pains and traumas of the Iraqi people and in the hearts and minds of those service members and veterans that have survived it. It is often here in the unseen trauma that war is most devastating.

With that in mind Iraq Veterans Against the War and Justseeds are proud to releaseWar is Trauma: a portfolio that highlights the unseen traumas of war. We invite everyone to go to the new War is Trauma website to download, print, and post these graphics everywhere and anywhere to help highlight the too often hidden psychological tolls on the Iraqi people and veterans.

In this military climate that continues to stigmatise service members who come forward about their unseen trauma, outbursts of destruction will continue to happen. Last week’s tragedy in Afghanistan where sixteen more innocent civilians were massacred is just one of the most recent examples. Robert Bales, the Army Staff Sergeant named in the Afghanistan murders was reportedly on his fourth deployment, had TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury), had been wounded twice, and had seen a fellow soldier lose a leg the day before.

Like Robert Bales whose three previous deployments were in Iraq, many of the troops now in Afghanistan have previously served in Iraq. Many arrive already suffering from Military Sexual Trauma, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and/or Traumatic Brain Injury. The military is in the midst of a suicide epidemic. Active duty service members are committing suicide at a rate of one every 36 hours. There have been at least 2,129 military suicides since 2001 and a least 4,194 veterans have died of self destructive and reckless behaviors. The trauma we and our fellow service members and veterans have experienced is often connected with the trauma that we have inflicted upon civilians.

On this anniversary please take a moment to:

Reflect upon those Iraqi civilians suffering from the trauma we have inflicted, the unknown number of dead and wounded Iraqis#, and the Iraqi refugees and internally displaced.

Reflect upon the lives of the 4,457 service members who died over the course of the war, the 2,333,973 service members who have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan over the last ten years, the 1,002,106 service members that deployed twice or more, and the 385,711 veterans that are now suffering from mental health conditions.

IVAW members in chapters across the country, in San Francisco, Olympia, WA, Chicago, and Washington DC to name a few, will be observing the Anniversary in various ways and one thing is certain, the events of this last week have cast a pall over an already somber occasion.

The reality behind the civilian death count; al-Qaeda's fictitious presence; torture, torture and more torture. .... a bill that no matter what is discovered about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, ...... Independent investigators like Jim Hoffman, David Ray Griffin, David .... If Iraq did not have oil, they would have escaped this fate.

War Without End: The Iraq War in Context By Michael Schwartz

• Globalization & Imperialism

• Middle East

In this razor-sharp analysis, TomDispatch.com commentator Michael Schwartz demolishes the myths used to sell the U.S. public the idea of an endless “war on terror” centered in Iraq.

He demonstrates how the U.S. occupation is fueling rather than restraining civil war in Iraq, and how U.S. officials systematically dismantled the Iraqi state and economy, helping to destroy rather than rebuild the country.

In a popular style, reminiscent of the best writing against the Vietnam war, he shows how the real U.S. interests in Iraq have been rooted in the geopolitics of oil and the expansion of a neoliberal economic model in the Middle East—and around the globe—at gunpoint.

War Without End also reveals how the failure of the United States in Iraq has forced U.S. planners to fundamentally rethink the imperial fantasies driving recent foreign policy.

About the author

Michael Schwartz, professor of sociology and faculty director of the Undergraduate College of Global Studies at Stony Brook University, has written extensively on the war in Iraq at sites including TomDispatch, ZNet, Asia Times, and Mother Jones, and in numerous magazines, including Contexts, Against the Current, and Z.

Video

Michael Schwartz discusses the neoliberal occupation of Iraq:

Reviews

“Americans have all along needed a sociologist, not a general, to help them understand Iraq. They need to know about social movements, not just militias, and about oil politics, not just personalities in the news. We have the incredible good fortune that the perspicacious Michael Schwartz boldly stepped forward to cast floods of illumination on the Iraq War and its tragic social costs.”

—Juan Cole, Informed Comment

“The best history of the U.S. occupation of Iraq that I've seen.… This book puts incidents of violence we hear about in the context of the massive violence we don't hear much about, and puts all of it in the context of the economic and social devastation imposed on Iraq…. Schwartz also helps to make the complex clearer and simpler by framing his account in terms of the actual oily motivations of our government, rather than any of the pretended rationales.”

—David Swanson, Global Research

"War Without End is a brilliant and readable introduction to the destruction wrought by America’s lust for oil and an insightful look at 21st century colonialism."

—Eleanor J. Bader

A. Colin Powell Admits In His New Book That The Decision To Go To War In Iraq Was ‘Never Debated’ May 9, 2012 By Michael Hayne

So you remember that pretend war for democracy in Iraq that cost us trillions of dollars and took the lives of thousands of US soldiers, not to mention ravaged an entire nation and created even more enemies for the United States all to better Haliburton’s bottom line? Well, it seems that not even a nanosecond of debate took place among the ranks of the Bush Administration.

Former Secretary of State and one of the very few sane Republicans left, Colin Powell, recently penned a book where he gives one of the most startling and equally nauseating accounts yet as it pertains to the Bush Administration’s horrible misadventure in the Middle East. According to Powell, key members of Bush’s cabinet never once debated about whether going to war in Iraq was a good idea. In other words, they might as well said because it was cloudy out or Bush was bored.

In a chapter discussing what he calls his “infamous” February 2003 speech to the United Nations where he authoritatively presented what was later exposed as gross misinformation about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Powell notes that by that time, war “was approaching,” according to the Huffington Post.

“By then, the President did not think war could be avoided,” Powell writes. “He had crossed the line in his own mind, even though the NSC [National Security Council] had never met — and never would meet — to discuss the decision.” (Source: Huffington Post)

The findings in Colin Powell’s book, It Worked For Me: In Life and Leadership, which is largely just a compilation of motivational parables, directly runs counter to George Bush’s account as illustrated in his memoir, Decision Points In his memoir, Bush claimed that his decision to go to war came after a long and deliberative process. Perhaps by long and deliberative, he meant during an episode of Spongebob Squarepants since we now have even further proof that not only wasn’t the cynical decision to wage war on Iraq a decision point, but there was virtually no decision-making process involved. Thus, a more befitting title for Bush’s memoir should’ve been Because they are brown, have oil, my daddy didn’t like them, and I didn’t want Cheney to think I was Gay for not going to War.

This ”undebated” war in which there wasn’t a modicum ideological fervor or study groups to justify its launching, which President Obama officially brought to an end Dec 31st, has cost taxpayers around $3 trilllion, left 4,487 U.S. service members dead and killed more than 100,000 Iraqis. Nevermind, let’s get back to screaming about vaginas and gay people wanting basic rights and how college kids are running up our deficit.

Michael is a comedian/VO artist/Columnist extraordinaire, who co-wrote an award-nominated comedy, produces a chapter of Laughing Liberally, wrote for NY Times Laugh Lines, guest-blogged for Joe Biden, and writes a column for MSNBC.com affiliated Cagle Media. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook, Youtube, like NJ Laughing Liberally Lab, and check out his Mitt Happens cafe press store. Seriously, follow him or he’ll send you a photo of Rush Limbaugh bending

The Pen theteam@peaceteam.net

June 1, 2012

Dear Friends and Activists,

We just got back from Cannes in France, where we premiered the now completed The Last War Crime movie at Marche Du Film. We attracted a lot of attention, including a major on camera interview by the BBC. It's about indicting Cheney for torture . . . and isn't that something billions of people want to see?

And while we are working on putting together a real distribution

deal, we are making available the special promotional DVDs for the film we put together for the occasion. And while they last you can have one for no charge, not even shipping, just by submitting the page below.

“Except for the most famous conflict photographers, such as W. Eugene Smith and David Douglas Duncan, there are few interviews published that offer an extended view of the craft of conflict photography. . . . The interviews in Photojournalists on War give the experience a full voice, and I know of no other comparable collection for any post-Vietnam conflict. . . . Nothing approaches the depth of Kamber’s book.”

With previously unpublished photographs by an incredibly diverse group of the world’s top news photographers, Photojournalists on War presents a groundbreaking new visual and oral history of America’s nine-year conflict in the Middle East. Michael Kamber interviewed photojournalists from many leading news organizations, including Agence France-Presse, the Associated Press, the Guardian, the Los Angeles Times, Magnum, Newsweek, the New York Times, Paris Match, Reuters, Time, the Times of London, VII Photo Agency, and the Washington Post, to create the most comprehensive collection of eyewitness accounts of the Iraq War yet published. These in-depth interviews offer first-person, frontline reports of the war as it unfolded, including key moments such as the battle for Fallujah, the toppling of Saddam’s statue, and the Haditha massacre. The photographers also vividly describe the often shocking and sometimes heroic actions that journalists undertook in trying to cover the war, as they discuss the role of the media and issues of censorship. These hard-hitting accounts and photographs, rare in the annals of any war, reveal the inside and untold stories behind the headlines in Iraq.

Michael Kamber has worked as a photojournalist for more than twenty-five years. He covered the war in Iraq as a writer and photographer for the New York Times between 2003 and 2012. Kamber was the Times’s principal photographer in Baghdad in 2007, the bloodiest year of the war. He is the recipient of a World Press Photo Award.

[The following rev. by Stephen Lendman is a major analysis not to be missed. Dick]

Reviewing Marjorie Cohn and Kathleen Gilberd's Rules of Disengagement: The Politics and Honor of Military Dissent, by Stephen Lendman http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2009/07/reviewing-marjorie-cohn-and-kathleen.html

Marjorie Cohn is a Distinguished Law Professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego where she's taught since 1991 and is the current President of the National Lawyers Guild. She's also been a criminal defense attorney at the trial and appellate levels, is an author, and writes many articles for professional journals, other publications, and numerous popular web sites.

Her record of achievements, distinctions, and awards are many and varied - for her teaching, writing, and her work as a lawyer and activist for peace, social and economic justice, and respect for the rule of law. Cohn's previous books include "Cameras in the Courtroom: Television and the Pursuit of Justice" and "Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law."

Her newest book just out, co-authored with Kathleen Gilberd (a recognized expert on military administrative law), is titled "Rules of Disengagement: The Politics and Honor of Military Dissent." It explores why US military personnel disobey orders and refuse to participate in two illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also explains that US and international law obligate them to do so.

Cohn and Gilberd write:

"Rules of Engagement limit forms of combat, levels of force, and legitimate enemy targets, defining what is legal in warfare and what is not. (They're also) defined by an established body of international (and US) law" that leave no ambiguity.

Nonetheless, in past and current US wars, virtually no "Rules" whatever are followed. Soldiers are trained to fire at "anything that moves," place no value on enemy lives, and often treat civilians no differently from combatants. It results in massive civilian casualties, dismissively called "collateral damage." It also gets growing numbers in the ranks to resist - to challenge so-called "Rules" they believe are illegal and immoral.

"Rules of Disengagement" "discuss(es) the laws and regulations governing military dissent and resistance - the legal rules of disengagement (and offers) practical guidelines (that include) political protest to requesting discharge from the service."

Today, growing Iraq and Afghanistan casualty counts are enormous as well as the disturbing toll on the GIs involved - including long and repeated deployments, often leaving permanent debilitating effects, physical and/or psychological.

US soldiers have a right and duty to dissent and resist, and today it's easier than ever through all the modern ways of communicating, including blogging, sharing stories, photos, videos, and "developing new ways to speak out to fellow soldiers and civilians online and in the media."

"Rules of Disengagement" goes into courtrooms where military personnel "have spoken out, arguing that (today's) wars are illegal (and immoral) under international (and US) law." It's a "practical guide" providing "specific discussion(s) of applicable regulations and laws" for readers "to form their own conclusions and consider their own options." Above all, it's a way for honorable young men and women to dissent, resist, and disengage from two illegal, immoral wars, in hopes many others will follow their example.

Resisting Illegal Wars

Every US war since WW II has been illegal. Article 51 of the UN Charter only permits the "right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member....until the Security Council has taken measures to maintain international peace and security."

In addition, Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 (the war powers clause) authorizes only both houses of Congress, not the president, to declare war. Nonetheless, that process was followed only five times in our history and last used on December 8, 1941 after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor.

Yet many judges won't apply "the law to the wars, and then to service members' refusal to take part" in them. They say it's "not their role, not a matter under their jurisdiction, or not 'relevant.' " In case studies the authors use, court-martial judges, juries, and the public increasingly accept these arguments but also recognize that "men and women of conscience have put their futures on the line for their opinions and actions against illegal wars (and) orders."

It hasn't shown up in court-martial decisions except in more lenient sentences, indicating growing respect for those brave enough to resist on matters of conscience and their opinions regarding the law. Pablo Paredes for one.

The Navy petty officer third class and weapons-control technician refused duty on the USS Bonhomme Richard as it deployed to the Persian Gulf on December 6, 2004 to take part in Operation Iraqi Freedom. He was charged with unauthorized absence and willfully missing his ship's deployment. On May 10, 2005, Paredes avoided jail and a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge when the court-martial judge dismissed the former charge, convicted him on the latter one, sentenced him to two months restriction, three months of hard labor without confinement, and reduction in rank from E-4 to E-1.

Lt. Cdr. Robert Klant denied expert testimony on the war's illegality, but let Cohn testify as an expert witness, at the sentencing hearing. At its conclusion, Klant astonished attending spectators by saying:

"I believe the government has successfully demonstrated a reasonable belief for every service member to decide that the wars in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq were illegal to fight in." Paredes benefitted from that view. Others have as well, but not often or easily.

Modern Conscientious Objectors (COs)

They're persons who refuse to perform military service, and request noncombatant status or discharge on grounds of religious, moral, ethical, or philosophical beliefs with regard to wars and killing. Objecting on the basis of conscience is 'a long and honorable" tradition going back to the beginning of the republic. It was used frequently during the Vietnam war.

Objectors help others by expanding the right to resist and dissent. Under DOD regulations, "the military must grant CO status to any service member who (consciously opposes all) war(s) in any form, whose opposition is founded on religious training and beliefs, and whose position is sincere and deeply held." This position "must have developed or become central to the CO's beliefs after entry into the military," and applicants must provide "clear and convincing evidence that he or she is a CO."

US Army Reserve Staff Sergeant Camilo Mejia was the first Iraq War veteran to refuse further involvement on matters of conscience after serving in it earlier from April - October 2003. Following leave, he failed to rejoin his National Guard unit and filed for discharge as a CO on grounds that the invasion and occupation were illegal and immoral. The Army then charged him with desertion to send a strong message to others who resist.

His May 2004 court-martial was a kangaroo-court show trial, widely broadcast to all military personnel worldwide on internal Pentagon television, radio and newspaper outlets. At trial, the military judge disallowed prepared defense testimony under Army Field Manual 27-10, the Constitution, and established international law.

Mejia was found guilty of desertion with intent to avoid hazardous duty. He was sentenced to a year in prison, reduction in rank to E-1, one year's forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge after which Amnesty International declared him a prisoner of conscience, its highest honor.

After the verdict, international law expert Francis Boyle was allowed to testify during the sentencing phase - but under strict limitations imposed by the judge. He cited relevant domestic, international, and military law, reviewed crimes of war and against humanity under them, and explained the culpability of commanders and government officials to the highest levels for abusing and torturing prisoners.

Mejia served nine months in prison and in August 2007 was elected chairman of the board of Iraq Veterans Against the War. Hundreds of others have filed for CO status while many more go AWOL or refuse deployment to combat zones. The military never makes it easy, yet the illegitimacy of two illegal wars and the immense hardships on young GIs and their families makes growing numbers resist and dissent. Still many others aren't aware that they qualify for CO status.

Current CO stereotypes stem from the Vietnam era when they were viewed as subversives and cowards. Other myths are that wars must be ongoing for those in the military to apply, the process is lengthy, discharges, if granted, won't be honorable, and federal benefits will be lost as well as eligibility for government jobs. "Needless to say, these myths are not true," but exist to discourage applicants and impede the process.

Various civilian organizations provide good information on CO rights, regulations on them, and procedures on how to apply. Also, the "CO process is one of the most legally protected of discharge proceedings - COs have greater rights than those who seek discharge for family hardship or similar reasons." Yet command hostility exists and rights are often denied. "Success rates vary among the services." Some COs are discharged for other reasons. Many applications are rejected. Some go AWOL as a result, and others do or don't succeed through court intervention. Imperial America doesn't make it easy, so applicants have to persist all the harder.

MORE http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2009/07/reviewing-marjorie-cohn-and-kathleen.html

WASHINGTON -- In the run-up to the war in Iraq, neoconservative hawks in and out of the Bush administration promised that the U.S. invasion would quickly transform that country into a strong ally, a model Arab democracy and a major oil producer that would lower world prices, even while paying for its own reconstruction.

"A new regime in Iraq would serve as a dramatic and inspiring example of freedom for other nations in the region," President George W. Bush told a crowd at the American Enterprise Institute in 2003, a few weeks before he launched the attack.

Ten bloody and grueling years later, Iraq is finally emerging from its ruins and establishing itself as a geopolitical player in the Middle East -- but not the way the neocons envisioned.

Though technically a democracy, Iraq's floundering government has degenerated into a tottering quasi-dictatorship. The costs of the war (more than $800 billion) and reconstruction (more than $50 billion) have been staggeringly high. And while Iraq is finally producing oil at pre-war levels, it is trying its best to drive oil prices as high as possible.

Most disturbing to many American foreign policy experts, however, is Iraq's extremely close relationship with Iran. Today, the country that was formerly Iran's deadliest rival is its strongest ally.

"These are the wonderful consequences of our intervention -- and the brilliance of it really is mindboggling," said Chas Freeman, a Middle East scholar and critic of the neoconservatives. "The extent to which Iraq has become an active collaborator with Iran ... is really very striking."

The U.S. is leading an intense international effort to pressure Iran to rein in its nuclear program. In January, the European Union agreed to join the U.S. embargo on Iranian oil, which went into effect this month.

Rather than help the U.S. in these endeavors, however, Iraq is doing quite the opposite. Iraq has been critical of the U.S. sanctions against Iran, and some fear it will help its neighbor avoid the penalty's sting by ferrying goods across their shared border.

Another top Obama administration goal in the Middle East is to push Bashar al-Assad's oppressive regime out of Syria. "For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside," President Barack Obama said last August.

But again, Iraq is working at cross-purposes to the U.S., decrying efforts to oust Assad and letting Iran use its airspace to ship weapons to Assad's government.

In fact, some Middle East scholars predict the rise of a Shiite Iran-Iraq-Syria axis, which could challenge Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Persian Gulf states for control of the region.

WANING U.S. INFLUENCE

Neoconservatives with the Bush administration imagined that post-invasion Iraq would serve as a staging ground for American military power in the region. The U.S. built about a dozen huge air bases, at a cost of around $2.4 billion, complete with long landing strips, massive fortifications and all the comforts of home. They clearly meant to stay.

They also intended to retain U.S. influence. The gargantuan U.S. embassy in Baghdad -- a heavily fortified compound the size of Vatican City -- is by far the largest the world has ever seen, and, at a cost of nearly three quarters of a billion dollars to build, the most expensive.

But even before the end of George Bush's presidency, the Iraqis insisted on setting a deadline for the departure of U.S. troops. And when Obama met that deadline in late 2011, the Department of Defense also had to turn over to the Iraqis all of those elaborate military bases.

The State Department has finally acknowledged that it needs to downsize its diplomatic presence in Iraq. Brett McGurk -- whose nomination to be the next U.S. ambassador to Baghdad was derailed by the release of some racy emails -- spoke bluntly in his confirmation hearing in June.

"Quite frankly, our presence in Iraq right now is too large," he said. "There's no proportionality also between our size and our influence. In fact, we spend a lot of diplomatic capital simply to sustain our presence."

The primary beneficiary of this colossal loss of U.S. influence in Iraq has been Iran.

The two countries share a long and sometimes tortured history. Their strongest bond comes from populations that are largely members of the Shia branch of Islam, rather than the Sunni branch, which is more common in the other Arab countries. The Shia clerics who are so influential in both countries frequently travel back and forth between the two, as well as sharing similar backgrounds and often being related by blood.

But the two countries' ethnic divisions -- Iranians are Persian, while most Iraqis are Arab -- and their fierce nationalism were exploited by Saddam Hussein, a Sunni, who turned Iraq into a bulwark against Iran, even going so far as to launch an eight-year war against Iran in 1980 that cost the lives of as many as a million soldiers.

When the U.S. toppled Saddam and purged his party's loyalists from the government and the military, Iran stepped in, providing support for both the Shia leaders working with the U.S. to form a new government and for the Shia militias that were fighting against the U.S. during its occupation.

Iraq's current president, Nouri al-Maliki, is particularly dependent on Iran because of the political, religious and commercial influence it has exerted in his favor -- most recently in June, when Maliki’s ruling coalition nearly fell apart yet again.

To the extent that the internal political struggle in the Middle East is fundamentally between Shiite Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia, it's clear to the Saudis where the Iraqis' allegiance lies. "He's an Iranian agent," Saudi King Abdullah said of Maliki in a March 2009 conversation with U.S. officials documented in a cable obtained by Wikileaks.

Maliki has "opened the door for Iranian influence in Iraq" since taking power, the king said.

Maliki still has some incentives to keep the relationship with the U.S. from going entirely cold. The State Department is still planning to spend nearly $5 billion in fiscal year 2013 on Iraq, half of it on maintaining its embassy. Iraq will also need the U.S.'s help operating the 36 heavily armed F-16s they recently bought, and it has designs on buying other modern weaponry as well.

But Maliki and other Iraqi leaders "understand that the U.S. will come and the U.S. will go," said Jamsheed Choksy, a professor of Iranian studies at Indiana University.

"People in the region know they can't count on the U.S. in the long term," he said. "If you're a Shia politician, you need Iran."

THE COIN OF THE REALM

Iraqi oil production is booming, at long last making it a major world supplier again. All that additional oil on the market is widely seen as being a blow to Iran, because it will help fill any shortfall caused by a boycott of Iranian oil.

But short of limiting its own production, Iraq is backing Iran as much as it can in the oil area as well.

Historically, there has been a split in the oil producer group OPEC between price hawks like Venezuela and Algeria, who want to drive the cost of oil as high as possible, and Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, who want to keep prices moderate.

At the most recent OPEC meeting, Iraq used its new clout to try to drive the prices up -- siding with Iran against the Saudis. It also backed a proposal that OPEC officially protest the new sanctions against Iran.

Both attempts failed, but some observers think Iraq could help Iran defy the sanctions in other ways.

"It remains to be seen whether the U.S. has enough leverage in Iraq to prevent Iraq from serving as a conduit for Iran for oil," Choksy said.

"They could, if they wanted to -- and they would never publicize this -- take Iranian oil across the border in tanker trucks, mix it with Iraqi oil, and send it out into the market as Iraqi oil," said Gary Sick, senior research scholar at Columbia University's Middle East Institute. (Iran recently did just that for Syria, when Syria faced an embargo of its oil exports but needed the money.)

Iraq's vast, unpatrolled border with Iran could also be a major conduit for illicit goods, making other sanctions ineffective.

FRIENDSHIP HAS ITS LIMITS

As significant as the alliance between Iraq and Iran is, however, it also might not last.

"Iran is far better off today with Iraq than it ever was with Saddam -- there's no comparison; but that doesn't mean that Iraq is a client state and takes its orders from Iran," Sick said.

"You have a government [in Baghdad] whose worldview is generally aligned with that of Tehran," said Michael Eisenstadt, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. But he said Iraqi leaders are adamantly opposed to the sort of clerical rule they see in Iran.

"Iran cannot dictate to Iraq," said Reidar Visser, a research fellow at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs who runs an Iraqi politics website. "Iraqi Shiites still see their interests as being quite distinct from Iranian Shiites."

Sick thinks the Iran-Iraq alliance could fracture over oil, especially if the embargo hurts Iran badly. "Iran's national interest would be to take oil off the market" in order to send prices up and hurt Western economies, Sick said. "But Iraq is really getting ready to play the oil game. I see this as a potential clash of direct national interests."

The neoconservatives, meanwhile, continue to hold out hope. Over at the new headquarters of the Foreign Policy Initiative, executive director Jamie Fly says "it's not clear yet" where Iraq will end up.

"I don't think it's a complete perversion of what was promised," he said. "I think it's probably a mixed bag at this point, in terms of how Iraq has developed as a regional player."

Fly also blamed many of Iraq's failings on the Obama administration's troop pullout. "The problem is that the current administration has dropped the ball, and we've undermined our own ability to help ensure that Iraq stays on a positive trajectory," he said.

"My concern about some of the Iranian influence and the role that Iraq may or may not be playing vis-à-vis Syria is in large part because we don't have a military presence there anymore, and that has weakened our hand and limited our ability to make sure that they don't get drawn further into Tehran's orbit," Fly said.

Predicting what's next in Iraq is next to impossible. In virtually no scenario, however, do things turn out how the neocons intended.

"Whatever [the war] was about, which was never entirely explained, it hasn't worked out terribly well," said Freeman, "and in fact Iraq continues to evolve in ways that are, if not fatal to American interests, certainly negative."

*************************

Dan Froomkin is senior Washington correspondent for The Huffington Post. You can send him an email, bookmark his page, subscribe to his RSS feed, follow him on Twitter or on Facebook, and/or become a fan and get email alerts when he writes

Contents of #10

Support the Lee Bill

Occupation and Resistance in Iraq and Afghanistan

Pew Poll of US Troops: War Not Worth It

Kucinich Steadfast

Bennis: Iraq War Continues

100 Poets Against the War

Violence Follows Withdrawal?

Leave Iraq When Promised

Van Buren: We Meant Well?

Contents of #11 Feb. 9, 2012

Haditha Films

IVAW Winter Soldier Film

Four Articles from HAW

Engelhardt: US Weakness

USA Today versus Invasion of Iraq

Cindy Sheehan on Leaving Iraq

WRL on Iraq’s Future

Cockburn, Lost Battle Against IEDs

Hedges and Al-Arian on Killing Innocents

Van Buren, on US Aid

Shear, Novel About Returned Marine

Zunes, Those Responsible

Hayden, Sectarian Future

Vets for Peace: Obama Declares End of War

Casualties and Deaths

This is the url for OMNI’S newsletters page; see the INDEX:

http://www.omnicenter.org/newsletter-archive/: Part of OMNI’s foundation in knowledge.

Friday, November 2, 2012

US CARRIER BATTLE/STRIKE GROUPS. Compiled by Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace, Justice, and Environmental Care.

Learn more about Stratfor.

Read more of our free reports.

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy

Secondary menu

 Reclaim My Account

 About Us

 Login

Search form

Search

Main menu

 Home

 Analysis

 Topics

 Regions

 Graphic of the Day

 Video

 Free Reports

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Friday, November 2, 2012

________________________________________

Topics > Military > Tracking U.S. Naval Power

U.S. Naval Update Map: Oct. 31, 2012

OCT 31, 2012
1732 GMT

This map shows the approximate locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and Amphibious Ready Groups.

Stratfor

Tracking U.S. Naval Power

The United States projects its geopolitical power around the world through the strength and reach of the U.S. Navy, and the most important ships in the navy are its aircraft carriers.

Sample Article: U.S. Naval Update Map: Oct. 31, 2012

The Naval Update Map shows the approximate current locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and Amphibious Ready Groups, based on available open-source information. No classified or operationally sensitive information is included in this weekly update. CSGs and ARGs are the keys to U.S. dominance of the world's oceans. A CSG is centered on an aircraft carrier, which projects U.S. naval and air power and supports a Carrier Air Wing. The CSG includes significant offensive strike capability. An ARG is centered on three amphibious warfare ships, with a Marine Expeditionary Unit embarked. An MEU is built around a heavily reinforced and mobile battalion of Marines.

• The USS John C. Stennis CSG with Carrier Air Wing 9 embarked is under way in the U.S. 5th Fleet AOR conducting missions supporting Operation Enduring Freedom, maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts.

• The USS George Washington CSG with Carrier Air Wing 5 is under way in the South China Sea while conducting a patrol of the western Pacific in support of regional security and stability of the vital Asia-Pacific region.

• The USS Enterprise CSG with Carrier Air Wing 1 embarked is heading home in the Atlantic Ocean after its final deployment.

• The USS Nimitz is under way in the Pacific Ocean conducting a Composite Training Unit Exercise.

• The USS Peleliu ARG with the 15th MEU embarked is under way in the Indian Ocean.

• The USS Bonhomme Richard ARG with the 31st MEU embarked is on a scheduled port visit to Hong Kong.

• The USS Boxer is under way in the Pacific Ocean for flight deck certification.

• The USS Wasp is under way in the Atlantic Ocean assisting in recovery operations in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy.

Print

U.S. Naval Update Map: Oct. 24, 2012

OCT 24, 2012
1437 GMT

This map shows an approximation of the locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and Amphibious Ready Groups.

U.S. Naval Update Map: Oct. 17, 2012

OCT 17, 2012
1751 GMT

This map shows an approximation of the locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and Amphibious Ready Groups.

U.S. Naval Update Map: Oct. 10, 2012

OCT 10, 2012
1921 GMT

This map shows an approximation of the locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and Amphibious Ready Groups.

U.S. Naval Update Map: Oct. 3, 2012

OCT 3, 2012
1955 GMT

This map shows an approximation of the locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and Amphibious Ready Groups.

U.S. Naval Update Map: Sept. 26, 2012

SEP 26, 2012
1846 GMT

This map shows an approximation of the locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and Amphibious Ready Groups.

An Unprecedented Minesweeping Exercise in the Strait of Hormuz

SEP 20, 2012
1047 GMT

Ongoing U.S.-led training operations are seeking to enhance anti-mine capabilities and send a message to Iran.

U.S. Naval Update Map: Sept. 19, 2012

SEP 19, 2012
1909 GMT

This map shows an approximation of the locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and Amphibious Ready Groups.

U.S. Naval Update Map: Sept. 12, 2012

SEP 12, 2012
1659 GMT

This map shows an approximation of the locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and Amphibious Ready Groups.

Tracking U.S. Naval Power Analysis Archive

Video, Charts and Maps

The International Mine Countermeasures Exercise 2012 and Iran

Limits of China's Submarine Operations

U.S. Cold War Containment Strategy

The U.S. Plan to Increase its Military Presence in Asia-Pacific

Dispatch: Sea Lanes, Natural Resources at Stake in the South China Sea

Tracking U.S. Naval Power Media Archive

Stratfor

 Contact Us



 Terms of Use



 Privacy Policy

1. Carrier battle group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_battle_group

The first naval task forces built around carriers appeared just prior to and during World ... The United States Sixth Fleet assembled a force of three carrier battle groups and a .... This precedent was established during World War II in the Battle of ...

2. Carrier strike group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_strike_group

In World War II, administratively, aircraft carriers were assigned to carrier divisions ... Throughout the 1990s, the U.S. Navy's aircraft carrier groups were officially .... in the U.S. Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean, and U.S. Fourth Fleet around the ...

3. Carrier Strike Group Ten - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_Strike_Group_Ten

U.S. Navy carrier strike groups are employed in a variety of roles, all of which involve ..... the operational challenges routinely encountered around the world.

4. Articles: Obama Wussed Out - American Thinker

www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/obama_wussed_out.html

Jul 3, 2011 – ... here beginning back on March 8, I've followed the reported movements of the U.S. Navy's carrier strike groups around the world, arguing that ...

5. Military
Stratfor

www.stratfor.com/topics/military/tracking-u.s.-naval-power

This map shows the approximate locations of U.S. Carrier Strike Groups and ... power around the world through the strength and reach of the U.S. Navy, and the ...

Oct 11, 2012 – Ships of the George Washington and John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Groups ... ( U.S. Navy photo by Chief Mass Communication Specialist Jennifer A. Villalovos) ... Strait of Malacca, one of the most important shipping lanes in the world. ... both CSGs patrolled the U.S. 7th Fleet area of operations over the last ...

Sep 28, 2012 – George Washington, John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Groups Patrol Western Pacific ... (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Kenneth Abbate) ... in one of the most dynamic and vital areas of the world," said Capt. ... editorial control over the information you may find at these locations.

8. U.S. military moves 3 aircraft carrier strike groups near Iran ...

www.defence.pk › Forum › Country Watch › Iranian Defence

Jan 12, 2012 – U.S. military moves 3 aircraft carrier strike groups near Iran ..... routes is just a pretext to impose their neo colonialism rules all around the world.

9. Panetta Accelerates Stennis Carrier Strike Group Deployment

www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=117139

Jul 16, 2012 – “The decision will help support existing naval force requirements in the Middle ... Aircraft carrier strike groups provide commanders with ample and flexible air ... tempo in order to meet U.S. security needs around the world,.

Jul 3, 2012 – World Twitter Logo. ... The flight deck of the American aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln in February in the Persian Gulf. ... in the region and the carrier strike groups that are on constant tours of the area. ... the chief of naval operations, assessing actions by Iranian Navy vessels over “the last couple of months.